A&M AD "Let's Talk About Conference Realignment"

[MightyWingman]

I think at this point the only honorable option left is hara-kiri.

Don't have a sword and my pocket knife wont do the trick.

 

[TIDE-HSV]

Don't have a sword and my pocket knife wont do the trick.

I just had this mental image of someone bouncing up and down on a Swiss Army knife, trying to do the deed...

 

[JPT4Bama]

I just had this mental image of someone bouncing up and down on a Swiss Army knife, trying to do the deed...

All the while urged on by the Yell Leaders or whatever they're called.. :biggrin:

 

[p'colabamaman]

I read the article and Byrnes side-stepped everyone of the statements. Never gave a legitimate answer to any of them. And kept calling UT their friends in Austin.:rolleye2: He's gonna make a great politician someday.

 

[Redwood Forrest]

Not to be argumentative, but he's right about the distance. As the crow flies, A&M to ISU is 801 miles (1602 round trip). A&M to USC is 924 miles (1848) round trip.

If we consider likely division affilliation (SEC W, assuming AU stays W and SEC adds a 14th team to the E from the ACC), the difference is even greater due to unusually close proximity of Big 12 South schools and additional divisional game (6 vs 5). Of course, if the 14th team came from the Big 12, AU would likely slide to the E, and distances would be shorter.

Distances in miles as the crow flies (one way/round trip):

BU (80/160)
UT (88/176)
OU (323/646)
OSU (381/762)
TT (382/764)
Total (1254/2508)
Ave (251/502)

LSU (309/618)
Ark (395/790)
UM (474/948)
MSU (482/964)
UA (545/1090)
AU (654/1308)
Total (2859/5718)
Ave (477/953)

Almost twice the distance/gm, well over twice the distance for total divisional play. Multiply that times total travelers over multiple sports, and he is likely not too far off about the increased mileage and costs.

This does not take into consideration that A&M likely busses to BU and UT (much cheaper), but would fly to every SEC opponent.

Hard to argue with numbers -- so I won't :smile: However, I still say this was a lame excuse. Why? Because they are stuck forever with the SWC II. They can never join another conference because of travel issues for students, so there is no reason to ever look around again.

In a few years when they do join the SEC, travel expense will be a non-issue, I'll bet.

 

[PacadermaTideUs]

Hard to argue with numbers -- so I won't :smile: However, I still say this was a lame excuse. Why? Because they are stuck forever with the SWC II. They can never join another conference because of travel issues for students, so there is no reason to ever look around again.

In a few years when they do join the SEC, travel expense will be a non-issue, I'll bet.

Oh, I agree. The SEC generally makes more bowl appearances, and more importantly, more high pay-out bowl appearances, than does the Big 12. So arguably, the SEC makes more revenue than does the Big 12. And though I don't know the specific revenue-sharing plans of each conference, it's my understanding that the SEC's plan is more equitable among its members than is the UT-dominated Big 12. So a higher percentage of that higher revenue would be going to an SEC-affiliated A&M. Again, without having looked at the exact numbers, I'd think that that would more than make up for the loss of revenue due to increased travel expenses.

If that weren't enough, from a recruiting standpoint, A&M wouldn't likely lose too much ground in TX. In fact, they may actually gain some ground because as things stand, TX talent that wants to stay in the Big 12 generally attends UT or OU, while TX talent who doesn't want to play in the Big 12 generally doesn't. Staying in the Big 12 means taking the leftover TX talent. A move to the SEC would at least enable them to capture TX talent that doesn't want to play in the Big 12. Additionally, a move to the SEC would be trading the slim-pickens of the southern plains (CO, NE, KS, IA, OK) for the southeast, enabling them to farm a region that trails only TX and CA for college football talent. Much of the talent that right now goes to Ark and LSU would suddenly start to consider A&M.

They'd be playing better competition. Steel sharpens steel. They'd be in a higher profile conference, so national recognition would be better. They are one of the most tradition-rich programs in the country. SEC is one of the most tradition-honoring conferences in the country. The're style of play is a great fit for the SEC.

My guess is that with higher revenue, better talent, better training (through competition) and better national recognition, they'd be challenging for the SEC W in 3-5 years. And a win in the west generally means a top 10 finish even with a loss in the SECCG. A win in the SECCG means NT consideration. Staying in the Big 12, they'll never challenge for the Big 12 S, much less the NT as long as UT and OK are around.

With all of this in play, Lord knows why they'd choose to remain a little sister playing in the relative anonymity of the long UT/OU shadow. A move to the SEC would be a win-win for both A&M and SEC in almost every regard (though a move to the SEC would make 4 teams in the western division wearing some combination of red and white).

So is his statement accurate? Yes. But it's still a copout. That million dollars more in travel expenses doesn't amount to a hill of beans when weighed against all the benefits of conference reallignment.

 

[jdatide]

I admit I am not fully up to speed on this whole thing (deployed military) but is this Bill Byrne a real guy or a fictional character, like Irving Loblolly or Leonard Postosties? Of his "11 statements" only nine are statements and two are questions. This doofus works at a college, right? The article should be entitled "I know what you are thinking and you may be correct, but here is what the university wants you to tell your friends and neighbors when they laugh at you. I hope it helps."

 

[Bama323]

Statement Four: I'm done supporting Texas A&M and will not return until you change conferences.

I regret that very much. One of the challenges we face at Texas A&M is we have never sold out Kyle Field in season tickets. I attributed that to a margin of our fans that focus on who the Aggies are playing instead the fact the Aggies are playing. Folks tell me they take pride on being big Aggie supporters. To the fans on the margin it means they have never missed a game against our friends from the state capital or a big game in general. Great program's fans support their team regardless of the opponent. They are grateful to be in the stadium. My hope is we can build Texas A&M football to be one of those great programs.

One wonders if this might have changed had TAM joined the SEC...

 

[bamanut_aj]

Umm...that makes no sense. If they're travelling the same distance to Iowa state, wherever the hell that is, as they would be to Columbia, it's a wash regardless of the sport. The outliers in both conferences are all pretty much the same distance from College Station. And they'd be playing Western Div teams anyway.

you miss the point. Football has the money to travel wherever they want...not so much for the other sports.

 

[Hamilton]

you miss the point. Football has the money to travel wherever they want...not so much for the other sports.

No, I didn't. What I was saying is that the distances are relatively the same, regardless of the conferences. They were going to jump to the PAC whatever, with schools JUST AS FAR from College Station as SEC schools. Baseball would have to travel to Oregon if they made that jump, just like football.